The fairness of any contest is being questioned when the umpire is not legally appointed. The credibility of such a contest is undermined well before combatants enter the ring. It becomes frustrating and confusing when the illegally appointed umpire tweaks on the law. This is exactly the case of the Independent Electoral Commission Chairman Mustapha Carayol who has legally exhausted his mandate but continues to be at the helm. And to further put a slap on our faces, Mr. Carayol was allowed to sponsor an elecoral reform bill which males it practically impossible for the opposition to compete in the 2016 presidential polls.
President Yahya Jammeh must have kept Carayol for a reason, which among others, could be to smoothen his (Jammeh’s) re-election. If that is not the case, Gambians should ask why Mustapha Carayol is still on the job 11 months before the polls. Is Jammeh retaining him until he (Carayol) cleared the road? Mr. Jammeh’s motive remains suspicious. But one legal expert wrote to Kairo News providing evidence that Mustapha Carayol’s holding of office is purely illegal. Read the expert’s take on the issue below.
Mustapha Carayol has no lawful mandate. Constitutional time stipulation has lapsed and it is incredible this man is squatting in the position.
According to section 42(2) of the Constitution: “….. the members of the Commission shall be appointed for a period of seven years and may be reappointed for one further term”. Carayol is 100% ILLEGAL as Chair of the IEC. What that means is that all his actions are unlawful and of no effect. Like I said though law has no capacity for self-implementation and the owner of the country has no issue with unlawful conduct as long as it furthers his agenda.
Carayol is a shameless man whose conduct exemplifies the crisis of morality in the country. the main excuse is “I am doing my job” and people couldn’t care less whether that coincides with legality or not.
Some people want the opposition to drag Mustapha Carayol to court for conniving with tbe government to breed illegality. Such a legal fight will leave the courts in a quagmire as to whether a person illegally occupying public has the mandate to sponsor a bill.